SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Del) 1545

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Vibhu Bakhru, J.
Mahipal @ Lala - Appellant
Versus
State (Govt. of NCT) of Delhi - Respondent
Crl.A. 43 of 2017 & Crl.M.A. 1304 of 2020 & Crl.M.(Bail) 7736 of 2020
Decided On : 08-10-2020

The reliability of forensic evidence and DNA analysis in corroborating the prosecutrix's allegations of sexual assault.

Headnote:

POCSO Act - Aggravated Penetrative Sexual Assault - Section 6 of POCSO Act, 2012 - Section 506 of IPC

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted for committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a child victim and convicted under Section 506 of the IPC. The prosecutrix, a minor, alleged that her step father had forcibly raped her multiple times and had threatened her. The medical examination indicated pregnancy and DNA analysis confirmed the appellant as the biological father of the fetus.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the prosecutrix's testimony inconsistent and not a sterling witness, but her allegations were sufficiently corroborated by forensic evidence. The court upheld the conviction and the sentence of twenty years of rigorous imprisonment.

Issues: Inconsistencies in the prosecutrix's testimony, reliability of medical evidence, and alleged tampering of samples.

Ratio Decidendi: Although the prosecutrix's testimony was inconsistent, her allegations were corroborated by forensic evidence, leading to the conviction. The court also found the medical evidence and DNA analysis to be reliable, dismissing the alleged tampering of samples.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the court upheld the conviction and the sentence of twenty years of rigorous imprisonment.

JUDGMENT

Vibhu Bakhru, J. The appellant has filed the present appeal seeking to challenge a judgment dated 02.08.2016 passed by the ASJ-01, North Rohini Courts, New Delhi, whereby the appellant was convicted for committing aggravated penetrative sexual assault on a child victim - an offence punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter `POCSO Act'). He was also convicted under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter `IPC'). The appellant also impugns an order on sentence dated 09.08.2016, whereby he was (i) sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of twenty years with a fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of thirty days, for committing the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act; and (ii)sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence punishable under Section 506 of the IPC. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The appellant was prosecuted pursuant to registration of FIR bearing no. 881/2014, under Sections 323/376/506 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act with PS Shahbad Dairy. The said FIR was registered on 07.08.2014, pursuant to the statement (PW3/D) made by a girl, who was aged about thirteen years at the material time. Her name is concealed and she is hereafter referred to as `the prosecutrix'. She had alleged that the appellant - who is her step father - had forcibly raped her multiple times and had threatened that he would kill her, if she disclosed the same to anybody. The prosecutrix alleged that on 05.08.2014, the accused had again raped (galat kaam) and beaten her.

3. On 07.08.2014, the prosecutrix along with one Ms. Shweta Bhardwaj came to PS Shahbad Dairy, Delhi and reported that the accused, who was her step father had done a wrong act (galat kaam) with her. WASI Rajbala, who was on duty that day recorded the DD entry 16A(Ex.PW4/A) and forwarded the same to WSI Urmil for further proceedings. WSI Urmil took the prosecutrix to BSA Hospital for medical examination along with WCt. Rajesh. The prosecutrix was medically examined and the concerned doctors handed over the exhibits of the victim to WCt. Rajesh. She in turn handed over the exhibits to WSI Urmil Sharma, who prepared a seizure memo (Ex.PW6/A) and seized the said exhibits. She came back to the PS and recorded the statement of the prosecutrix (Ex.PW3/A). On the basis of the said statement, she prepared a rukka (Ex.PW18/A) and handed over the same to the Duty Officer for registration of the FIR.

4. The prosecutrix stated that she was residing in her village Farrukhabad, since her childhood, along with her family and had completed her schooling till sixth standard in Farrukhabad. She stated that about three to four years ago, she along with her parents and her younger brother came to Delhi and took up residence in Sultan Puri. She stated that her mother started working in a factory, where she met the accused who used to drive a vehicle (Champion Vehicle) in the factory. She stated that thereafter, the accused started visiting their residence and this resulted in her parents fighting with each-other. She stated that on one day, her father left the house along with her younger brother and returned back to their village. She stated that the wife of the accused also suspected that the accused was having a relationship with her mother and she took both her children and left the accused. She stated that thereafter, the accused and her mother got married and they started residing in a rented house in Mangol Puri. She stated that after their marriage, both of them used to quarrel quite often, which would often be violent (marpeet hone lagi). She stated that about four months ago, her mother committed suicide by hanging herself. Thereafter, the accused moved to a rented accommodation at Pansali and took her along as well. She stated that after about one month of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top